| Congrats! Enjoy having to pay to have your new house wired with coax! Or, better yet, having nothing at all (for those who are building in new communities that are no longer attractive targets for plant expansion)!
Any MDU tenants that had discounted service due to exclusivity deals can probably kiss those reduced rates goodbye too.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Plant and inside wiring is two different things. Cable, under the franchise authority, is usually required to PASS the property in the area. To EXTEND the plant on to the property of an apartment complex is usually part of the agreement to wire the apartment community.
Telephone, on the other hand, (copper - not fiber unless it's their primary delivery) IS required to pass all living units.
When it comes to apartments, if the complex is in the franchise area, cable MUST, at minimum, pass the property with the plant to make it serviceable. However, cable is not required to extend plant on to the property unless the owners want it in.
Cable has been also installing the coax in the new building or via outside molding to existing complexes at no cost for exclusive access in many cases.
What this new rule will likely do is not really give new builds any greater competition. I think what is going to happen is that an apartment owner may tell one or the other "stay out" which will cause the reverse of what's happening now.
Believe it or not, in the case of Verizon vs Comcast, there are people that don't want anything to do with Verizon. Not everyone hates cable... This would, if were the case, open up yet another problem.
The point I'm making is that with this new rule, there is much uncertainty to come but I think it will only affect new build, not existing. Even in existing cases, the competitor will still have to get permission to enter the property with their service.
Let the new set of problems begin.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
emptywigHuh? What?Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX | reply to Done_Posting
I don't know what you're talking about. The cable company doesn't wire up people's houses with coax. Maybe MDU, but not houses. At least not here.
wig
--
Sometimes a paradox is just a paradox |
| said by emptywig:I don't know what you're talking about. The cable company doesn't wire up people's houses with coax. Maybe MDU, but not houses. At least not here. wig I obviously can't speak as any kind of authority on the subject but I know it's not uncommon for MSO's to make deals with builders to wire new buildings / houses in return for a crack at exclusivity. I believe this is much more likely to occur in a new development, where many houses are constructed at once. When I wrote my comment I was really thinking more about newly built apartment communities and housing developments that would require extension of the MSO's physical plant in order to pass the customer. Fiberguy mentioned regulatory obligations to provide services to these type of customers (see above -- he seems to know a lot more than I do about this particular subject). I'll concede that I'm not 100% familiar with all aspects of this issue, so take my comments with a grain of salt.
- Tate
|
